fidraisle-1 Reviews

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017–2023)

Give it a miss

[1/10 · 26 October 2021]

Costumes, yes. Settings, yes. Nothing else, seriously. I felt acute embarrassment at the blatant stereotypes, I wanted to like it, but after six episodes, I gave up on it. And while the clothing and settings are excellent, they can't carry ten series. This could be so much better, I actually started watching the first episode of the third season (an accident) it was incomprehensible. I tried to convince myself that watching the first season would render the glimpse of the third season more comprehensible. It didn't.

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017–2023)

A great big "Meh".

[1/10 · 1 October 2021]

I wanted to like this. Indeed, the costuming is superlative, I study historic clothing (of just about every age), and this is beautifully done, the make-up and accessories, near perfection. The settings, the same, it's wonderful to see something done so right. The. Acting was wonderful as well, I believed, the characters (including actual historic figures) were all well scripted. However, the script itself was seriously flawed, slang and buzz-words from the late 20th/early 21st century cropped up far too often, spoiling what promised to be a delightful series. Also, the time frame seemed either too slow or too fast. I wanted to like it, it had so much going for it, but in the end, after binging the first season, I gave up.

Lost Relics of the Knights Templar (2020– )

Dodgy, at best.

[1/10 · 15 April 2021]

In the first episode, the two 'collectors' are given two options for authenticating their "Hoard" either 1) Take it to the British museum and have it properly examined or 2) Do it yourself and go harrying off acorss the world doing your own research and coming to your own conclusions. Yeh, they went for the second option, at that point I turned it off. Besides that, the items looked dodgy. One of the goblets looks like something I've seen repeatedly at re-enactor markets. The hilt of the sword is a bit short based on the length of the blade. I've seen daggers in museums with longer handles. As a plot for a film, this sounds good, as a legimate discovery....not so much.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)

I liked it.

[7/10 · 5 January 2021]

This is one of those films that should have been expanded into a trilogy. Too much got jammed into to short a time. But it was fun. And I enjoyed it immensely. BTW, I'm a member of the "Class of '77" I saw "Star Wars" in the cinema when it first opened.

The Legend of Robin Hood (1975)

Nearly perfect!

[9/10 · 5 January 2021]

It's on YouTube (and yes, you can get it on DVD if you look hard enough). My husband (a wise man when it comes to historical films, and in particularly medieval films) tempered his recommendation with "I don't know if you'll like it..." I'm a historian and I study medieval history, particularly the garments. I steeled myself. I can only say that I am shocked, it's.....it's...right. Someone actualy went out, researched the period, had clothing made (mostly right, one or two are not as good as they could be, but are far and away better than the average. I'm stunned, propery hair styling proper clothing, proper behaviour....Yes, this is GOOD. And very, very good.

Wedding Crashers (2005)

Wedding Crashers? Well....more like a traffic crash

[1/10 · 8 November 2019]

Maybe it got good in the last few minutes. I'll never know. I thought it looked like a right good sex romp, a comedy in the style of the good old fashion British ones. No. This is just dreadful. After the first few minutes when the two "heros" push the boat out and say " and use lots of other inuendo, one certainly hopes the boat develops a hole and sinks. And that was it. If I had to guess, I'd say it was written by a couple of geeky men, who stayed up late one night drinking, and instead of just talking, they wrote everything down. This is one part male fantasy...and that's it.

Rocketman (I) (2019)

Not at all what I expected.

[3/10 · 24 June 2019]

Not at all what I expected, and I expected precious little. Let me make this clear, I like Elton John's music. I like musicals. What could possibly go wrong? Well, let's just say I'm delighted to say I streamed it free and didn't waste money either going to the cinema or ended up buying the DVD / Bluray. Did it reflect Elton John's life? There's only one person who could answer that, and he assisted in writing it, so whether there was an ounce of truth in the story or not, I couldn't tell you, I'm not a rabid fan. I like his music. I don't think I've got one album not even on Spotify. But this? This was hype, and fantasy, and fairly badly written at that. About the only way I'd watch this again is if it was on telly, and there was absolutely nothing else on worth watching. Overall, I found it vapid and depressing.

Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle (2003)

Unbelievably, a film worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space"

[1/10 · 18 May 2019]

I had seen the first of the two, and while not enthusiastic about the treatment of the 70's series (which even as a teenager I thought misogynistic, and exploitative) I thought watching the sequel on Netflix might be entertaining. I was wrong.

I spent the next tortured minutes (however there might be of it) begging it to get better. This plea fell on deaf ears. There seemed to be at least half a dozen plots, with the most tenuous (forced) connection, and scenes that made the original television series look like something on PBS.

Was it meant to be a parody? A comedy? A serious remake? It was a half a dozen plots jumbled together, and they were badly written, badly acted, saving John Cleese, who was clearly the best actor there. Had his and his daughter's relationship been the central part of the plot, I think it might have saved the whole thing. But it wasn't, and it didn't.

I kept exclaiming "It can't get any worse..." but it did. Repeatedly.

I've seen some bad films, "Moulin Rouge","Interstellar", "Plan 9 From Outer Space" "Christopher Columbus : The Discovery" (a film so bad, and so historically inaccurate, that I walked out, I would have walked out of "Moulin Rouge" but I was on a date), but "Charlie's Angels : Full Throttle" leaves them all in the dust. I'd give it negative stars, if I could.

Bonnie & Clyde (2013)

I'll say there will be "spoilers"

[1/10 · 14 April 2017]

This is another of those films that gets a "1" only because it's not possible to give it a "0". Normally, I am critical of a film if it is meant to be historic and the costuming fails abysmally. This is not true in this case. If there is one thing that could be praised, it would be the very well done costuming. But sadly, like another "historical" series ("Outlander") though the costuming is brilliant, the story line is absolute rubbish. The story of Bonnie and Clyde is fascinating enough without the voice-over, the pure fantasy story that was woven through this. I tried about three different times to watch this (thank goodness for Netflix) and I gave up. The 1967 version with Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway was not good, but it was far, far better than this nonsense.

Interstellar (2014)

Maybe spoilers. I'm still watching it as I type.

[1/10 · 11 February 2017]

It could be worse, I suppose. I do appreciate that this is written with science in mind, and with masses of scientific research. Well done there. However, having watched about an hour of watching the film, (and looking at the synopsis here), I have to say, I'm not loving it. The only thing I'm going to enjoy at the end of this is that I can say, "I've watched it," and then the knowledge I never have to watch it again. Don't get me wrong, the science appears to be solid (again, well done, nice to see some one making the effort). But there are a few things that make enjoying this film rather difficult. The constant flash forward of the documentary style memories of earth during this difficult time, and then the flashing back to the...for want of better words "action" of the film. I do understand the references to what has happened before the film opens, and well done in the writing, but it's a tad forced, and there are far too many questions that aren't addressed. I think too much is being crammed into the time frame. Having finally watched it, and reached the end I am delighted to say "I've seen it." And even more delighted to say "I never have to watch that again." There were lots of places that the film could have ended, places that would have made a great deal more sense. There are bits of real science, and then we end up with basically "some stuff we made up at the last minute."

Galavant (2015–2016)

Won't rhyme to praise the show, but I will let you know.....

[10/10 · 5 February 2016]

....It's fabulous. Spoiler...alert...spoiler alert... I'm a re-enactor, amateur historian and all around costuming geek. So, no, not all the costumes are accurate for the 13th century. If any. So what? This is one of those rare series that makes even me say "So what?" And that's me, I once got upset with a film ("The Untouchables") because a woman's eye make-up was not appropriate for the time. The only error I could find in the film. But, with "Galavant" It's fun, it's quick, it's quick witted and it's hysterically funny. I have been HOWLING with laughter watching it. They had me at the beginning where a sign points to Valencia one way, and Winterfell the other. Oh...it's going to be like that is it? Brilliant. Bring it on. Historical? Not 100%....Hysterical? Absolutely! And well written. Thank you to the team who have created this genius. It's nice to see some quality out there!

Saving Mr. Banks (2013)

Enjoyable. Could have done better.

[5/10 · 15 January 2016]

This is not one of those films I'd rush out to see at the cinema, despite the casting, it just didn't entice me to spend £15 for myself and my husband to see it, and another £10 for supper afterwards. But I digress. This title is now on Netflix. It is not for children, as the flashbacks are a bit too dark for children. As a matter of fact, the flashbacks are what holds it back completely. A brief scene wherein Mrs Travers discusses her childhood (briefly) with someone would have been enough. As it was, these scenes dragged the film down both in time and emotion. It wasn't bad, and Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks were absolutely brilliant in their respective roles. But it could have been so much better.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)

What could possibly go wrong?

[1/10 · 3 August 2015]

I wanted to like this film. I'd seen clips, I knew the music, knew the screenwriter's works, I knew this had to be one of best films of all time. And then I sat down to watch it. I don't know what let it down. The script was brilliant. Acting? Hardly, well written, well acted, well filmed. I think it was the costuming that screamed "This is the 1960's...!" and the make up....same thing. After fifteen minutes of this I switched it off. I wish I'd never watched it, the film I thought it would be was so much better. If you aren't bothered by continuity errors (such as wardrobe and makeup not giving a fig about what people wore in a historical era) I'm sure you'll find it entertaining. I'm a historian and it bothers me, intensely. Yes, I'm sure if I drank a lot of alcoholic beverages and watched it again, I'd find it has lots allegory...but until then, no. I didn't like it.

Chicago (2002)

What can I say?

[1/10 · 10 May 2015]

I'm very glad I watched this on Netflix. Because if I'd seen it at the cinema, I'd have walked out. Seriously. The action flashes back and forth, from fantasy sequences to "real" life...maybe that was the whole idea. To make the viewing audience question what was going on. The music might be good, the costuming wasn't awful. But after about 10 minutes, I'd had enough. I turned it off. I really, really can't imagine this won awards (ah, but so did "Moulin Rouge" and that was one of the worst films I've ever been forced to watch in my life). If you want a good film depicting the same era, I recommend "The Untouchables", which is far from perfect, but far better.

Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)

What? Wow

[10/10 · 1 May 2015]

Like so many, I listened to the critics and gave this film a miss. Yesterday, after seeing some clips from it, I streamed it. It has a plot, it has well written, strong, well defined characters. It's not only good, it's fantastic! I couldn't believe how good it was. I kept thinking, "This can't be Disney, it's far too good." (And that era of Disney was a bit weak). I started looking at our crew, Milo, a lanky, tousle-haired, braces wearing leader, who isn't a leader, but, is. We have a tough guy mercenary with a questionable moral compass, there's a young female mechanic, who knows more about engines than other people have forgotten. We have a kindly, super intelligent doctor (who is black). We have a female warrior type who brooks no nonsense and could easily (and happily) tie you in knots. They have a nicely steam-punk looking transport. And it is just....amazing. Then, as the closing credits started to run, I saw the name of one of the writers. Joss Whedon. Well. That explains a lot. It's basically "Firefly", underwater...slightly for children. Brilliant. Well worth a watch, I watched two minutes and ordered a copy.

Cinderella (I) (2015)

Once upon a time....again....

[1/10 · 24 April 2015]

It could have been worse. It could have been a musical. If you want a good live action Cinderella, I suggest you try "Ever After", or, if you want a slightly different take on the story, I highly recommend a book. "Witches Abroad" by Terry Pratchett. One of the great failings in this film is the costuming which didn't seem to know where and when it was set. Georgian and medieval rubbed shoulders with modern prom dresses and 40's chic. It would have been interesting if any of the designs were any good. They were not. It's a bit too long and a bit too dark for children, and a little too light in the script for adults. There were lots of Disney references, if you care to watch it repeatedly to find them all. I won't be bothering. Thank goodness for streaming, say I. All I lost was time.

Outlander (2014– )

Science-fiction, Scotland, time-travel and romance. What's not to like? Well.....

[2/10 · 20 April 2015]

Ever since the books were first published, people have been recommending them to me. "Recommending" as in "let me drive you to the bookstore" sort of recommendation. Each time, something would come up, and I would plan to buy the books at a later date. It seemed to be a sure thing, Scotland, romance, and science fiction, three things near and dear to my heart. Then it was announced that they would be filming the series, again, friends and acquaintances started recommending it. This was nearly a guaranteed thing, the costuming was carefully researched (there are a very few exceptions, but they are there, still, the level of research is brilliant, something sadly lacking in many historical dramas, "Marco Polo", "Borgias", "Reign" and "Elizabeth" & "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" to name but a few), it's filmed in Scotland, (I'm familiar with that country, and I noticed), the mannerisms, customs, and music are all very neatly researched. I'm a historian, these are things that normally drive me to distraction in most series, I rage, (quietly, at home) it's not that difficult. My own humble library could produce a well researched series, but as mentioned there are so many historical dramas that simply can't be bothered. I love science fiction (and time travel particularly), I'm a Doctor Who fan, so finding that "Outlander" had a "Doctor Who" connection should have tickled me to bits. The history, beautifully done, (10 stars alone for the fact that our heroine is an army nurse, well done for giving the women in the armed services during WWII a profile). So, why then, two stars? Sadly, it's the plot. I enjoyed watching the series, but at a point, the plot started to go, to borrow a phrase, "wibbly-wobbly". To the point that, sadly, if the series goes into a second series, I won't be watching. There are a few things that stand out a mile.

Let's start with our hero. As stated, I'm a historian, so the whole idea that a healthy, heterosexual, adult Scottish male was a virgin strains credulity.

Temporal physics (or, shall we say "Theoretical Temporal Physics). Originally, our heroine slips through time by being at the standing stones at Samhain. (Bonuses all 'round here, the fact that they call it by it's proper name, and the whole admission that the church "borrowed" these holidays is just so well done, that I could have easily not watched past this and given it a "12". ) But we are speaking of the series physics. I could buy into the travelling through time on Samhain through standing stones. As one, who, (shall we say), respects these things, you wouldn't catch me messing about standing stones on Samhain. But Claire does it anyway. In some of the later books (I've googled their plots, I was curious as to what would happen) it seems that any old standing stones, any time at all, and hey! presto! Time travel. If you've planned on doing this all along, why make a big deal about it in the first episode?

Let's look at Claire and Frank. Like many couples separated by World War II, they are struggling to return to the levels of intimacy they enjoyed prior to the war. Lucky for Claire that Frank is a forward thinking chap. I got the distinct impression that things weren't exactly going swimmingly for them. Yet, despite everything, once in the 18th century, our heroine, (who we are given to understand is an independent, intelligent, strong woman with knowledge of history) wants nothing more than to return to her husband and her questionable married future. As a historian, and a strong woman with historical knowledge, the last thing I'd be thinking about was my husband (particularly when surrounded by a load of handsome highlanders, thank you very much,) (many apologies to my husband). I'd imagined that she could have used her fore-knowledge to alter history. This could have worked so well, she changes history, and therefore has no future husband to go to. There were so many possibilities. Sadly, from the previews of the other books, the plots tend to get silly from here.

This series is so beautifully done, it's just sad that the plot lets it down so badly.

War Horse (2011)

I really wanted to like this film.

[1/10 · 8 June 2014]

I'm what is known as an animal lover. More specifically, I love horses. "Secretariat"? I cried buckets. "Seabiscuit"? Ditto. I'd seen the magnificent puppetry involved in "War Horse" in the theatres in London, I was mesmerized by it (I have seen the examples of the puppetry, without seeing the play itself). So I braced myself when it came on Netflix. I knew I was going to cry my eyes out. Time and again, I thought of watching it, but I could not bring myself to put myself through the emotional turmoil. Last night, there was nothing on the terrestrial television channels, so my husband put on War Horse. Up front, I will say, the music is very good, as is the costuming (I study costuming, so that's usually my first complaint). The story? Not so good. I felt it jumped about too much to be enjoyable. (This might work in the theatre, but not so well in cinema). The relationship between Albert and Joey (really? JOEY? Could he not have come up with a better name than that?)I didn't buy at all. Clearly, this lad had no clue about horses (a bit odd, considering he was a farmer at the turn of the century). Having schooled a horse, I can tell you, the first thing you need, and that's to be smarter than the horse, and from the film, I don't feel that was the case. "Oh I know what will be smart, I'll teach the horse to respond to a common bird call." The poor horse (a nervous and hot blooded thouroughbred) would have been a nervous wreck within a week. A girl appears for no apparent reason. She gets mentioned again later, but as the rich chap who was squiring her around in his automobile couldn't remember her name, we don't know either. She should have been named Emily, to resonate with the French girl with a similar name, but no, we weren't given any information about her at all. To be blunt, this film was all "fur coat and no knickers", promised much, and delivered very little. I wanted to like it, I wanted to fall madly in love with it, I wanted to weep salt tears over it. All I felt when it was over was relief.

The White Queen (2013)

Worse than awful.

[1/10 · 25 November 2013]

If you like fantasy, with swords and sorcery, I recommend Mr Jackson's excellent adaptation of "The Lord of the Rings", if you want medieval history, avoid this programme like the plague. I speak as a historian, and one who studies the costuming of the period, and by strange chance, I happen to be descended from many of the historical characters represented in this appalling travesty. My husband enjoyed the series, I had a look in at one point, saw costuming spanning a few centuries and several different countries (one of which was closed with a zipper, clearly viewed from the back in one scene). If you can't be bothered to get minor details right, just don't bother. Which is excellent advice for this series. Don't bother.

Medieval Dead (2013–2016)

Shakespearian in nature.

[3/10 · 15 November 2013]

When I say, "Shakespearian"...I mean "Much Ado About Nothing", while the content is intriguing and promises much...promises seem to be about the only thing we do get. Trailers for episodes show the highlights for upcoming episodes, and, sadly, are more interesting. While I understand that not every archaeological site contains interesting artefacts, it would be nice to actually see some of them, or in fact, any of them. I've only seen the three episodes broadcast so far, but my future viewing hinges on the next one. If, like its predecessors it is yet another case of "Fur coat and no knickers" I'll cease to watch. Watching a group of archaeologists for an hour, listening to all the evidence and then watching them come up with nothing for their efforts (repeatedly) was dull watching when it happened the first time. Watching it three weeks in a row with the same outcome is becoming futile.

The Borgias (1981)

If you don't know the history, don't watch

[10/10 · 4 February 2006]

I've seen any number of critiques on this series...all of them negative. I'm sorry I can't agree. Having studied this period of history, I'm afraid you will have to accept the fact that the BBC left out some of the most shocking aspects, and indeed this is what life was like in the Italian Renaissance. It is difficult, if not impossible, for modern morals to be fitted to history. "The past is a different country", never could it be truer in this sense. There isn't space enough, here, to fully explain the complexities of 15th/16th century politics and morality. "The Borgias" did indeed reflect reality, except, as I have said, this is a bit sanitised and not as opulent as it should have been. The costuming is very good (again, if you have studied the period there are minute errors, but they are very minor), and the portrayals of the characters are excellent. Once again, I say, please study the history first, then view the series.

The Cisco Kid (1994 TV Movie)

A lovely romp....

[8/10 · 26 July 2005]

I remember the television series when I was a kid, it wasn't shown on television very often, as it was a bit controversial even back in the 70's, but even then, I remember it was a bit more comical than any of the other westerns. And when a 12 year old can tell the difference...that's not good.

This new version is fun. Cheech Marin as Poncho is simply brilliant casting. Jimmy Smits might not be the best choice as the Cisco Kid (Johnny Depp would have been a much better choice, and probably a bit more believable.) Less believable were the women's costumes and some of the uniforms (I crave your pardon, I study historical costuming...and believe me, it's not difficult to find references or even patterns with very little effort, on the other hand it likely took a LOT of effort to get it wrong.) But I ENJOYED the film. It was as much fun (or more) than the old black and white episodes I used to watch on TV on a Saturday afternoon. The first thing I did when I finished watching "The Cisco Kid" on video was re-wind it and watch it all over again. There are some movies that are just fun, and this is one of them.